Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

whose insurance does not pay for birth control?

Posted By: Kendra on 2008-11-17
In Reply to: Perhaps this is why - insurance does not pay

Mine sure as heck does. It is much cheaper to prevent births than pay for them. It makes fiscal sense.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

My insurance pays for birth control.
x
How about if some of us are using birth control to be responsible and control.......sm
the size of our families, as almost every family has to do? And believe me, I tried the "rhythm" method, and I have my beautiful son, Alex, as a response. And I adore him, and thankfully we found ways to afford him, care for him in every way, etc., but some sexual aides and birth control are actually used by Christian couples who have been married for 28 years, gong on 29 in May. sex is also important in a loving marriage, not just to "do whatever feels good." There is nothing shameful in married, committed sex.
Pro birth control....s/m
I'm definitely not pro abortion, but am pro choice in, what should be, the rare event of unexpected pregnancy, and in that case I think that the woman herself should be the one to decide whether to terminate the pregnancy or not, and if so, it should remain a safe, and legal option.  It's an extremely emotional, and difficult decision for most women to have to make in that situation.. I did a quick look and see that the abortion rate in the US has declined from 1996 to 2002. I'm going to look for statistics from 2002 to the present when I have more time. I think the key in the main is stressing birth control measures, and also making those measures affordable to all women across all socio-economic groups.
Birth control is....
used to prevent pregnancy......not kill an innocent child AFTER it is conceived.   BIG DIFFERENCE!!!!  How do you people sleep at night?
As far as birth control....I have not seen anything about...
people wanting to remove birth control. Just because an individual elects not to use it does not mean they do not want anyone else to have access. With this permissive society liberals have created there is really no choice but to provide it.

Yes, there are natural causes for miscarriage. That is leaving it up to God. For us to put the life of an innocent child totally in the hands of someone else to choose whether it lives or dies, just as a personal choice, I believe is wrong. Just as those in these orphanges murdered children...it is murder. Killing an innocent for no reason other than "oops" is wrong.

What overturning Roe vs. wade would do is put it back in the hands of legislators who, by the constitution, are the only ones who can enact laws. The Supreme Court should not be enacting laws. They are to interpret...not legislate. I believe it should be overturned because it is unconstitutional. Then put it to a state-by-state vote. Some states would outlaw abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or life of mother. Some would outlaw it, period. Some would allow it in all forms. But at least it would be the will of the people.

Why do you think congress has never tried to pass an abortion law? Even when the democrats had control? Even before Roe vs. Wade? The truth is in the pudding.
BTW, there are much better birth control
options than birth control pills. One of them IUDs, when those are in, there is nothing to 'forget' about them.
Not everyone has the same access to birth control. sm
I guess you didn't watch 20/20 this past Friday night? You can view it on their website. Go to http://abcnews.go.com/2020 and click on Watch: Babies in Memphis

I think everyone who is interested in this current thread would find it interesting, whatever your opinion on abortion is. It was called "Babyland" because that's what the locals call the cemetary where all the premature babies who die are buried if their mother can't afford to bury them.

It was about how the poverty-striken areas in Memphis, TN have much greater rates of premature births and deaths of babies than the more affleunt areas. Why? Lots of reasons, but probably the main one is lack of money, which means lack of prenatal care. No insurance and no easy access to a free or low-cost clinic. Lack of education. The girl they profiled was 18 and pregnant, and they showed another girl who had gotten pregnant at 12 yrs old, now a mother at 13. I mean, yeah, a 12 y/o shouldn't be having sex - she's still a child, but how in the world would she have access to birth control? She wouldn't.

It showed how the closest clinic is only open during the day (and only 1/2 day on Sat., to cut costs). No evening or weekend hours, so what are you supposed to do, take time off work, which you can't afford, to go get birth control (or prenatal care, etc.) which you also can't afford? I mean to you or me it may seem like a no-brainer - if nothing else go to the drugstore and get a box of condoms for $10.00, or the Today sponge thingie, but maybe they don't even have an extra $10.00 (or the time and $ to take 2 buses to get to the drugstore?).

All I'm saying is, the situation is different for everyone. I've personally never had an easy time with any method of birth control I've tried, and it's a bit of a wonder to me that I've never had an unplanned pregnancy because of that. Maybe because of that, I try to be less judgmental of others. Oops, more to say but I've got to go...


Birth control would have been nice.
.
I knew about birth control.
However, was I willing to go to my mom and ask her to put me on the pill.  I knew my mother would have suspected my sexual activity and I didn't want her to know.  Most teens also have the belief that "it won't happen to me."  Now that I'm older, I see how some of the decisions I made back when I was 17 were poor ones, but at that time I thought they were great ideas.  Do I blame my mom and dad for the bad decisions I made back then....no.  Those were my decisions, my choices, and I had to deal with the consequences. 
She supports birth control and ..

supports abstinence-only education in schools, but she has also said she does not support tax payer dollars to distribute birth control in schools. She is a member of Feminists for Life, which is an pro-life group.

Feminist for Life is a pro-life group that has had its positions distorted to show that they are against birth control. Palin critics (including many in the media) have cherry picked in order to smear Gov. Palin.


i'm appalled that she is anti birth control
into office?!?!
Guess what? Birth control doesn't always work!
and judging a teen and a mother based on those assumptions?? Sure hope the shoe isn't on the other foot one day. I know many women, wed and unwed, who have gotten pregnant while on the pill, taking it responsibly and consistently. There is no sure birth control, and any woman with a lick of sense should know that without a doubt.

Are you all honestly saying that someone with a full-time job therefore cannot raise a family or is incapable of spending adequate time with their children? If so, then everyone here working full-time with a family, raise your hands because you are now classified as unfit mothers. I don't care if you work from home or not, because even at home, if you're working, then you aren't giving your children undivided 24/7 attention. For that matter, if you sleep at night, you'd better raise your hand because you can't watch your kids if you're asleep. We could always go back to the 1950s version of mothers, I'm sure every child from that era was perfectly well-adjusted.

BTW, it takes TWO to make a baby so why is it always the FEMALE that is blasted? Seriously, especially if you are a woman making such comments, you should be thoroughly ashamed. Unless she's the new Virgin Mary, she didn't knock herself up, and unless you were present during the conception, you don't know if birth control was used. Just because Mom is against it doesn't mean the teen wouldn't use it anyway. Mom was obviously against teen sex but that apparently didn't stop her. Did you do every single thing your parents expected of you? If you say yes, then you should run for POTUS. Perfect people are so rare that any in existence would surely be voted into office. Then again, maybe not, because Jesus is the only perfect person I can recall and he was crucified.
Abortion shouldn't even be an issue. With all the forms of birth control
available, many at low or no cost, not to mention abstinence, abortion should not even be an issue.  Too many people use it as a form of birth control and it isn't.  I know there are some circumstances that warrant an abortion, but those are rare.  Abortion may be legal, but it is immoral. 
President is going after overblown insurance charges, crooked insurance plans, .....sm
crooked hospital systems that have become quite prosperous "businesses" on the backs of the elderly, but he is NOT AGAINST the eldery getting good solid care, that is political hogwash and propaganda, you wise up and read up, and I don't mean from Fox or Coulter of Limbaugh or one of the Pub sources......

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=av1lMcI6E1no&refer=home

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
Conservatives are for control over their own children and less control by govt

you want it both ways, it is dem fault with control, and when they had no control
it was their fault as well. yes GB did not get anything done, no deregulation, no war, no shift of power to the corporations, nothing.

so you are saying he was utterly incompetent?
Control? If you mean, control of putting our country
nm
Health insurance
I'm not sure about that specific point, but in her plan if you don't purchase medical insurance your wages will be garnished. How's that for communism?
Insurance companies.
I agree the insurance companies need a very, very major overhaul, but do you think the insurance companies are going to do that??? If they would there would be no need for a government run system, but the insurance companies will do absolutely zilch, and things cannot contine the way that they have been going.
I'd like to see the insurance companies

You're right about the mtg. insurance
It also irks me that somehow we are being asked for $700 billion to help these companies when $700 billion would go a long way toward ensuring Americans have health insurance - what about that Mr. Bush?
mccain - insurance
The Truth about the McCain-Palin Health Care Plan

"


Barack Obama And Joe Biden Have Consistently Lied To Americans About John McCain's Plan. Their claims have failed every fact-check - from CBS to the Washington Post. John McCain is not going to raise taxes on middle class families. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are the only ones in this race that plan to raise taxes.


Get



OBAMA FICTION
John McCain Will Tax Health Care Benefits For The First Time And Will Be the Largest Middle Class Tax Increase In History.


THE FACTS
This Obama charge is a blatant mischaracterization of the McCain Health Plan. It only focuses on the fact that the value of the employer provided insurance will now show up as additional income for the employees – what he fails to mention – is that John McCain’s generous refundable tax credit ($5,000 for families and $2,500 for individuals) will not only shield millions of families from a tax increase but will actually give them MORE dollars to invest in their health care needs.


The McCain Plan DOES NOT tax:



  • Premiums paid by families and individuals


  • Employers for providing health care coverage


  • Medical expenses like the cost of a procedure or medication


  • Insurance claims

Approach Supported By Obama’s Own Advisor: This is an approach supported by Barack Obama's own Senior Economic Advisor Jason Furman who wrote that "we could scrap the current deduction altogether and replace it with progressive tax credits that, together with other changes, would ensure that every American has affordable health insurance."


Better Than "Members of Congress":  Under the McCain Plan, your employer can provide you with health insurance  as good as a "Member of Congress" (approximately $12,000), and you would pay no  more in taxes – regardless of your tax bracket.  In fact, you would have additional money left over from the McCain tax credit to put in a health savings account.








 
Income Tax Liability

McCain-Palin
Tax Credit

Total Tax Savings
































10% Bracket
(Up to $15,000)
$1,200 ($12,000 x 10%) $5,000 +$3,800
15% Bracket ($15,650 - $63,700)
$1,800 ($12,000 x 15%) $5,000 +$3,200
25% Bracket ($63,700 - $128,500)
$3,000 ($12,000 x 25%) $5,000 +$2,000
28% Bracket ($128,500 - $195,850)
$3,360 ($12,000 x 28%) $5,000 +$1,640
33% Bracket ($195,850 - $349,700)
$3,960 ($12,000 x 33%) $5,000 +$1,040
35% Bracket ($349,700 and Over)
$4,200 ($12,000 x 35%) $5,000 +$800

Where Is The Middle-Class "Tax Increase"?   If you or your family is in the 28% bracket, with an income of $180,000, you could receive employer provided health insurance even better than a Member of Congress, with a cost of almost $18,000, with no increase in taxes. Even the liberal leaning Tax Policy Center, agrees that the McCain proposals will result in a "net tax benefit" of more than $1,200 for an average tax payer. A recent Lewin Group study estimated savings of more than $1,400 per American family – almost three times the savings as under the Obama plan.

O says that he will force insurance
companies to insure preexisting conditions. That sounds like something that will put them out of business to me. No need to buy insurance until you need it. Think of all the lost jobs.
He is not going to mandate that you have insurance -
he is only going to make sure that it is available to everyone whether they have an employer-based program or not.
if you already have insurance you don't have to change - nm
x
Nobody said free insurance -
where did you get that? He said he would make insurance available at an affordable rate for everybody...
But what if you didn't have any insurance...sm
at all? Wouldn't they let you die then because they won't treat you?
But insurance companies already tell us no

What's the difference who says no?  Some insurance companies pretty much say no to everything but wellness visits - and that's simply so they can find out if you develop a condition, so they can drop your coverage on a threabare excuse, or jack your rates to the moon so you'll have to drop it.  Then no other company has to cover you due to it being preexisting.  I don't want to pay for insurance that only covers me if I'm not sick!


At least if there was universal healthcare, even with a wait, they'd have to treat you eventually instead of NEVER.  And do it for free.


How are insurance companies...

...involved in the transcription of patient notes?


That just doesn't make sense.


With health insurance, though

we are all driving basically the same model and we are insuring it for what could possibly happen, not what will or actually does. 


Way back in the 1960s when I first started working, my company's health insurance did not cover single women for most 'female' issues, especially birth control and/or pregnancy-related issues, which has since been deemed discriminatory.  Now you must cover everyone equally for every contingency. 


The only way to individually ajust coverage costs would to be to exclude coverage based on genetic testing and/or family history, or maybe lifestyle issues such as alcohol or tobacco use or risky behavior like sky diving, which consumers have been fighting for years.  This would probably also be deemed discriminatory.


Before canceling your insurance, you

should have checked a few things out.


I feel for you, but a pre-existing condition is NOT uninsurable if you have had insurance for 30 days prior to the illness.


Case in point: We had private health insurance paid for out of our own pockets for 6 years. DH had open heart surgery. In the meantime I got a job with a company, signed up for insurance and they stated a 1 year before they would insure him. Yet, it was less than 30 days since I signed up. All I needed was a Certificate of Insurance from our private carrier, and then no waiting period. I got that, and he is now totally insured under the company plan.


If you did not cancel your insurance until after your problem, you have a way out. Just ask the former insurance company for a certificate of insurance and no one can turn you down.


I'm not trying to be mean or whatever you want to call it, I'm trying to help, so don't take it the wrong way. Best of luck and hopefully, things will turn around for you.


Insurance companies and the politicians they buy..

Doesn't anybody in DC have a conscience?  The system as it stands now is disgusting.  They are literally making billions by killing of thousands upon thousands (maybe millions?) of Americans.  Anyone with half a brain should recognize profit-driven health insurance only serves the best interest of the CEOs of the insurance companies - not healthcare recipients! This needs to change NOW!


I saw my first AMA commercial last night urging people to vote with the millions of uninsured Americans in mind.  I loved it!  It is at least a step in the right direction.  Vote with the healthcare crisis in mind people!


Insurance industry stats

I just came across these stats in an article I was reading.  How can there possibly any doubt that lobbying has single handedly taken over Washington?  Especially in light of the fact that the healthcare plans on the table are pushing for more insured rather than single payer system?  If we don't shove out the insurance companies, how are the prices for our healthcare ever expected to go down, or even stay at the current level for any length of time? 87% in 10 years?  Absolutely ridiculous.  We are not reaping any benefit from it whatsoever.   


"As premiums have ballooned by 87 percent in the past decade, insurance-industry profits have climbed from $20.8 billion in 2002 to $57.5 billion in 2006. During that same period, health-care interests spent $2.2 billion on federal lobbying, more than did any other sector, and as of last month, had flooded the presidential candidates with over $11 million in campaign contributions to keep the present system intact."


MANDATORY HEALTH INSURANCE
You said it so well! It will bring everyone down too. What about more sliding scale clinics? We have one where I live and the care is quite good. They have patients from all income levels. Maybe we should give more tax breaks to those sliding scale clinics and encourage people with good insurance and lots of money to attend those clinics more often in order that others with less can afford decent care. I wish the Clintons would quit trying to force their health care ideas down our throats. Maybe they want us all to be socialists? By the way in case you have not guessed by now I am a Lifelong Republican, soon to be a right wing independent unless Fred or Duncan Hunter win. No one should be "forced" to get health insurance, especially one of the "crap" varieties that you mention in your post.
Rush has good insurance.
Nice to see Rush has good insurance.  I bet he is up to at least 8 OxyContin a day.  On H & C tonight, he was higher than usual.  He says, "I protect children under 12 years old and "seasoned citizens".  How do you season a citizen?  Salt?  Pepper?  Garlic Salt?  Then fast forward and he says, all the "womens" will vote for Hilliary, he corrected himself and said "women".  It really, really scares me to think people actually listen to him.  By the way, Pakistan is ablaze tonight. 
Insurance companies cont...sm
You made reference to the fact that you already are paying through the nose for insurance premiums and don't want to end up paying even more to cover the uninsured.

I think the general gist of reform is to guarantee access to all, and at the same time, lower the costs for people such as yourself.

Whatever direction health care reform takes it will take government intervention, either in terms of mandating what insurance companies can charge for policies for all people, likely putting caps on prohibitive prescription drugs and windfall profits made by health care providers and hospitals, etc.

What the US spends on health care is far, far above what every other country pays for health care, and that is not because the US has superior care in many cases. It's a profit driven business that has become extremely out of control. It cannot continue in its current business as usual form, as it is no longer working to the benefit of most.
You view of the dem health insurance is way..sm
too simplistic. The idea is to have people pay what they can afford on a sliding scale for private health insurance. You have your private doctor and everything you have with your insurance now, much like people who have been in Medicaid. The only difference is that Medicaid is for the poorest and is free. The Obama insurance would cost what is a reasonable price based on what you can afford. I am not a know it all about this subject, but this is basically what I understand about it. It would not be run like the VA. I think we should bag the VA from the horrors I have heard about them. For shame treating our veterans like that!
indiana has insurance for children
Hoosier Healthwise is a health insurance program for Indiana children, pregnant women, and low-income families. Health care is provided at little or no cost to Indiana families enrolled in the program. The enrolled member chooses a doctor to get regular checkups and health care for illnesses. Other health needs such as prescriptions, dental care, vision care, family planning services, and mental health services are also available as part of the Hoosier Healthwise program.
This public insurance is not free -
it will still have premiums attached to it - it will just be made available to more people.
Health insurance for children up to age 30...
Does no one see what is wrong with this picture?


Hint.....children.....30-year-old children...those children that should have their own jobs and their own health insurance.



Private insurance and SCHIPS not the same.
SCHIPS is for CHILDREN, not parents. Federal mandates that seek to raise the age of allowable coverage for natural children of parents with PRIVATE insurance makes perfect sense. Parents (not the govt) pay premium on young adults who would otherwise not be able to afford insurance. What's the problem here?
Hello. They are referring to PRIVATE insurance.
Do you have kids? Would you like to see them go to college? Graduate school? Law school? Medical school? Would you or would you not like to have the option to carry YOUR OWN CHILDREN on your insurance beyond age 17? I think that parents who want to cover their kids (and other members of their family, for that matter, like parents, in-laws, sisters, brothers, etc) should have that choice under a group rate that would be cheaper than individual policies that some of them otherwise would not be able to afford. It's called medical care reform and the aim is to INSURE people, not exclude them. got it?
$300 for health insurance is a deal.

cost $1,000 or more a month?


Health insurance premiums, plus their refusal to insure people with preexisting conditions, are becoming prohibitive costwise for many (millions of Americans) to afford.


Though the example you gave may be true for some younger folks, I believe that's the exception and not the rule.


There is a huge crisis in healthcare in this country today.  Good for you that you can afford it and just blame everyone else who can't.  Maybe someday soon you'll be in the same boat with the 50-odd million Americans who simply can't afford it.  Who will you blame then?


Health insurance is my number 1 issue

I agree with some of what you said about the state representatives being held accountable.  I did vote for Senate candidates in the last election based on their stances on healthcare.  One of them has been working tirelessly (with many others) to expand CHIP health insurance to kids to more middle-income children in the state, and he was successful!  Now that the income bracket was raised, my 6-year-old has healthcare again, and I am so grateful! (Bush is threatening to veto the legislation that expanded CHIP to more families, though, so I'm praying he does not do that).


I am relatively young (26) and so many of my friends do not vote.  I am always encouraging them to do just that (whether they vote Democrat or Republican), and I think if Senate recall (I think that's what you called it) was in place, more of them might vote.  For now, we just have to hope they keep their campaign promises in hopes of being re-elected.


I know Congress needs to pass the bills on health insurance, and I know many of the Congressmen (on both sides of the aisle) have been bought and paid for by the insurance companies, and that is very disturbing to me.  That's one of the reasons I like Obama so much - I think he is a good man who has not been "bought and paid for" by any big corporations.


I think America needs to cover all medical costs for our children and our elderly, and I hope more Republicans candidates will address that issue.  We need to take better care of our most helpless citizens.


 


To me $1000 health insurance premium is a lot

That's fine you don't care about the fact that many families are working their fingers to the bone just to pay for necessities, including health insurance, but I do.  I care very much and am very sad that so many people in this country only seem to care about children that come from upper middle class and rich families.  I guess they deserve better health care than the middle-class kids.  I don't know how people that feel that way can go to bed with a clear conscience.


People in Congress that we took the time to elect put a lot of effort into negotiating this bill to make both parties relatively happy.  YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE TAXED FOR IT.  THE CIGARETTE TAX WOULD HAVE GONE UP.  Keep telling yourself what you need to tell yourself to sleep at night, but the fact is kids with diabetes from a lower-middle-class income family have less of a chance of surviving than a child from an upper class income family.  That is a sad, sad, fact.


The Candidate's Health Insurance Plans
MCCAIN:

• McCain's health care plan will increase taxes on employer-based insurance, and kick 20 million people off the rolls.

• McCain's plan will throw you into the individual market, where the same plan your employer offered will cost $2,000 more, and you can be refused care because you were sick 10 years ago.

• McCain's plan will shift costs onto the sick.

OBAMA:

• Obama's plan will cover tens of millions of Americans and reform the insurance industry such that everyone gets a fair deal and no one can be discriminated against because they were once sick or unlucky.

• It will create a group market that businesses can buy their employees into so that a small business that paints homes doesn't have to run a tiny insurance company on the side and an entrepreneur can pursue his idea without having to learn about health coverage regulations.

• It will cover all children. And Christ almighty, isn't it time we did at least that?
I agree....cost and insurance practices DO...
need overhaul. And McCain has good ideas to take care of that, called competition. Making all insurance available in all parts of the country is a start...so no monopolies in certain parts of the country. Now there are some really great plans, trouble is, not available everywhere in the country. McCain thinks if you offer a policy, you offer it everywhere, if you are a national company. Insurance companies, if they toe the line, can help control costs, just like they do in certain parts of the country where physicians will take whatever the insurane company is willing to pay. If they are made to compete nationally prices will have to come down. That is what competitive market does. And rather than having the government muck around in it, McCain is just going to give a tax credit $2500 individual and $5000 family to help pay premiums. That is pretty significant, and no strings attached. You still make your own health care decisions. And that works for me.
OK, I'll bite. What insurance companies and when?
Insurance companies have ALWAYS been a for profit idea. So they need to collect premiums from people who ARE NOT sick to cover the thousands they pay out for someone else who IS sick. So how is this going to work? Like I said, if this becomes a reality, I for one am going to immediately drop my coverage until such time as I need it. Unless their other healthy customers are stupid, they are going to do the same. So then the only people who will be paying insurance premiums are the ones who are also using their policies to fund their heart transplants, chemotherapy, whatever. Take a guess what their premiums are going to be.


WC is not a government program - it is insurance that the company's pay
nm
If the profit factor (insurance companies)...
...is removed, we will save a TON of money.
Employer provided medical insurance

originated, I believe, during FDR's New Deal.  When wages were capped, employers found a way to circumvent this by providing ''sickness insurance'' for their employees, thus giving them a raise without violating the wage caps. 


Another example of government meddling.  Had they not imposed wage caps, employers would have been able to keep paying their employees and give raises to enable them to afford their own healthcare.  But instead, we grew the employer-provided healthcare system we have now and people experience ''job lock,'' unable to move to another employer because of pre-existing conditions which may not be covered by a new company's insurance plan. 


Of course it's income, always has been.  Same as use of a company car, or executive housing provided by a company (both of which are taxable to the extent they are used outside of actual business activities.)   I'm amazed nobody until now has taxed insurance.


Does this constitute a new tax on people earning under $250 thousand (or $235 thousand, or whatever the new number is?)